Why I think (hope) the consortium will be good for the hobby - Example from ATS

[CTcollector1]

http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=598435&STARTPAGE=1

 

 

Hopefully, they will help clean up stuff like this.

[Prethen]

Clean up in what way?

[Cladiator]

I don't see this as a reason collectors need the "consortium". Enough already with the babysitter mentality. You want to know enough about coins so that you can avoid the pitfalls of the industry? Then learn about the damn coins! Why expect someone else to protect you?

 

To hell in a hand basket I tell you, to hell in a handbasket...

[Prethen]

Calm down, Cladiator. Put down the weapon and back away.

 

It's only coins!

 

[CTcollector1]

I don't see this as a reason collectors need the "consortium". Enough already with the babysitter mentality. You want to know enough about coins so that you can avoid the pitfalls of the industry? Then learn about the damn coins! Why expect someone else to protect you?

 

To hell in a hand basket I tell you, to hell in a handbasket...

 

I said the consortium will be good for the hobby and nothing about needs or baby sitting.

[Cladiator]

I don't see this as a reason collectors need the "consortium". Enough already with the babysitter mentality. You want to know enough about coins so that you can avoid the pitfalls of the industry? Then learn about the damn coins! Why expect someone else to protect you?

 

To hell in a hand basket I tell you, to hell in a handbasket...

 

I said the consortium will be good for the hobby and nothing about needs or baby sitting.

People think it will be good for the hobby because it will be telling collectors what coins are "good" and by not granting their label on other coins they will be telling collectors that those coins are "bad".

 

I say leave it up to the collector to educate themselves and decide for themselves if the coin is good or bad. They don't need a group of people to babysit and tell them how they are supposed to feel about the coins.

[DirtyGoldMan]

I don't see this as a reason collectors need the "consortium". Enough already with the babysitter mentality. You want to know enough about coins so that you can avoid the pitfalls of the industry? Then learn about the damn coins! Why expect someone else to protect you?

 

To hell in a hand basket I tell you, to hell in a handbasket...

 

As I posted ATS:

 

It's not about the babysitting. It's about the disincentive to ruin a nice coin for more money. If all of the "good coins" were stickered and the "bad coins" were not stickered, someone might think twice about taking a "good coin" and making a "bad coin" out of it.

 

[Cladiator]

A more appropriate and effective way of disincentive would simply be to out those doctors who are screwing with the coins. The dealer community knows who these people are yet they balk and choke up when ever someone asks for them to be identified. They say they are afraid of being sued and all that. Hey, if someone is actively doctoring coins and you know about it, then tell the world about it. Hell, take out an add in NN or CW proclaiming it.

 

These people operate in the shadows only because no one has the balls to turn the light on them.

[PerryHall]

Do you really think the Consortium wouldn't have stickered that coin?

[MarkFeld]

A more appropriate and effective way of disincentive would simply be to out those doctors who are screwing with the coins. The dealer community knows who these people are yet they balk and choke up when ever someone asks for them to be identified. They say they are afraid of being sued and all that. Hey, if someone is actively doctoring coins and you know about it, then tell the world about it. Hell, take out an add in NN or CW proclaiming it.

 

These people operate in the shadows only because no one has the balls to turn the light on them.

Knowing it and proving it if you get sued can be two very different things.

 

Edited to add:

It's not about the babysitting. It's about the disincentive to ruin a nice coin for more money.

I agree with Robert.

[Cladiator]

It's not about the babysitting. It's about the disincentive to ruin a nice coin for more money.

I agree with Robert.

It won't serve as a disincentive. It'll mearly force the doctors to change tactics. It's just like every time some company introduces a new security feature. It doesn't stop the crime, it just forces the criminals to figure out a new way to defeat it.

 

I think starting a new TPG and holding to strict, published standards without fail would be the best way to combat junky coins in PCGS and NGC slabs.

[CTcollector1]

I don't see this as a reason collectors need the "consortium". Enough already with the babysitter mentality. You want to know enough about coins so that you can avoid the pitfalls of the industry? Then learn about the damn coins! Why expect someone else to protect you?

 

To hell in a hand basket I tell you, to hell in a handbasket...

 

I said the consortium will be good for the hobby and nothing about needs or baby sitting.

People think it will be good for the hobby because it will be telling collectors what coins are "good" and by not granting their label on other coins they will be telling collectors that those coins are "bad".

 

I say leave it up to the collector to educate themselves and decide for themselves if the coin is good or bad. They don't need a group of people to babysit and tell them how they are supposed to feel about the coins.

 

Any effort to slow down or stop the doctoring and blatant over grading is a good thing. Collectors, whether they are astute enough to decide for themselves or not, can only benefit. But that is just my opinion. If others want to bury $90k in a coin that in reality is worth only $30k, more power to them.

[Cladiator]

[CTcollector1]

 

[MarkFeld]

It won't serve as a disincentive. It'll mearly force the doctors to change tactics. It's just like every time some company introduces a new security feature. It doesn't stop the crime, it just forces the criminals to figure out a new way to defeat it.

Even IF you are correct, I much prefer that the coin doctors be forced to change tactics than that they be allowed to continue with the status quo. Similar arguments to yours have been made with respect to the battle against drugs, counterfeiters, etc., but that doesn't mean it's better to stand by and do nothing.

[Cladiator]

It won't serve as a disincentive. It'll mearly force the doctors to change tactics. It's just like every time some company introduces a new security feature. It doesn't stop the crime, it just forces the criminals to figure out a new way to defeat it.

Even IF you are correct, I much prefer that the coin doctors be forced to change tactics than that they be allowed to continue with the status quo. Similar arguments to yours have been made with respect to the battle against drugs, counterfeiters, etc., but that doesn't mean it's better to stand by and do nothing.

Here's a novel idea...how about tell everyone who the doctors are???

 

You know some towns publish in their newspapers the names of their residents that don't pay their taxes, get busted for prostitution, default on their mortage, etc... Public scorn is a very powerfull thing.

[James_OldeTowne]

So... it's undergraded in the PCGS holder, overgraded in the NGC holder, and we still can't use another grading service?

 

[DonHeath]

Mark,

 

Assuming you had purchased that coin from Heritage, would you have left it in the PCGS 50 holder and sought to have it stickered, or moved it to a more appropriate holder if it deserved it and then sought to have it stickered. Also, do you think the sticker might provide enough incentive to keep someone from moving a coin from 50 to 61? That's a big gap, so this coin might be the exception rather than the norm. $60,000 is a lot of incentive.

[MarkFeld]

Mark,

 

Assuming you had purchased that coin from Heritage, would you have left it in the PCGS 50 holder and sought to have it stickered, or moved it to a more appropriate holder if it deserved it and then sought to have it stickered. Also, do you think the sticker might provide enough incentive to keep someone from moving a coin from 50 to 61? That's a big gap, so this coin might be the exception rather than the norm. $60,000 is a lot of incentive.

Don, I will have to answer your question hypothetically, since, not having it in hand, I don't know what my opinion of its grade is. And, you should know that currently, I rarely submit uncertified coins for grading or, certified coins for re-grading or crossover service. Most of the coins I submit are on behalf of clients.

 

If I thought the coin was an AU53 or AU55, instead of an AU50, I believe that I would submit it to CAC. On the other hand, if I believed that it deserved an AU58 or higher I likely would submit it to PCGS in the holder for re-grade.

 

With a (potential) grade disparity of the magnitude we have witnessed, I don't necessarily think that a CAC sticker would have prevented a crack out, (possible conservation) and (re)submission to the same or a different grading company. I think it is also important to note, that without seeing the coin in person, we can only speculate as to whether it has been "conserved", etc, as we might just be seeing the effects of different images.

 

If I failed to address your questions adequately, please feel free to let me know.

[carson city]

CAC will be about the dealers and $$$ not about the collectors !

[DonHeath]

Mark,

 

Thank you. I realize this coin might represent the exception rather than the rule, as the jump was so large, and we're all speculating based on images from two different photographers. Thanks for the response.

 

 

[toyonakataro]

I don't have a concrete opinion on CAC yet because I don't know how they will work.

But I can't always buy coins sight seen or have someone you trust look at the coin in person.

So it might be better to have more people's opinion when you buy coins....at least when you buy it sight unseen.

[pendragon1998]

It's about the disincentive to ruin a nice coin for more money. If all of the "good coins" were stickered and the "bad coins" were not stickered, someone might think twice about taking a "good coin" and making a "bad coin" out of it.

 

 

Isn't that the same argument that was made when TPG started?

 

I don't know if I'm the first one to say it or not - but I'm going to buy the coin, not the sticker.

 

[MikeInFL]

A more appropriate and effective way of disincentive would simply be to out those doctors who are screwing with the coins. The dealer community knows who these people are yet they balk and choke up when ever someone asks for them to be identified. They say they are afraid of being sued and all that. Hey, if someone is actively doctoring coins and you know about it, then tell the world about it. Hell, take out an add in NN or CW proclaiming it.

 

These people operate in the shadows only because no one has the balls to turn the light on them.

 

Tell me who they are and show me the proof. I have the balls...Mike

 

p.s. I agree with the OP.

[Conder101]

A more appropriate and effective way of disincentive would simply be to out those doctors who are screwing with the coins. The dealer community knows who these people are yet they balk and choke up when ever someone asks for them to be identified. They say they are afraid of being sued and all that. Hey, if someone is actively doctoring coins and you know about it, then tell the world about it. Hell, take out an add in NN or CW proclaiming it.

 

These people operate in the shadows only because no one has the balls to turn the light on them.

That was why the "Coin Posse" was formed what two, three years ago? It's mission was to go after the Coin Doctors and try to shut them down. It was said they could do it because they knew the dealer network and could find out who the doctors were.

 

Since it was formed it has concentrated trying to get refunds from scam telemarketing types for people who spent lots of money on overpriced coins that they knew nothing about simply because someone told them too. A noble purpose, but not the one they were formed to fight, and so far they have not outed a single Coin Doctor that I know of.

[PerryHall]

That was why the "Coin Posse" was formed what two, three years ago? It's mission was to go after the Coin Doctors and try to shut them down. It was said they could do it because they knew the dealer network and could find out who the doctors were.

 

I thought the purpose of the coin posse was to fight the boiler room operations that were selling grossly overpriced coins to unknowledgable victums.